-->

Monday, April 7, 2014

Pandora's Box Has Been Opened

On March 24, 2014, Douglas Vogt’s filed his Petition for Certiorari with the Supreme Court which has been assigned Case No: 13-1158. That Petition sought review of the refusal of the Federal District Court to refer Vogt’s Affidavits regarding the forgery of Obama's birth certificate to a federal Grand Jury as it was required to do by Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6(a).

Vogt has now filed in Case No.: 13-1158 a Motion to Disqualify Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor upon the grounds that their appointment to the Supreme Court was an act Barack Hussein Obama was not authorized to make as he is not a legitimate President. Accordingly, Vogt argues, neither Justice Elena Kagan nor Justice Sonia Sotomayor should decide a case which ultimately may determine whether they should remain on the Supreme Court.

In the Motion to Disqualify, Vogt further argues that not only was Obama's appointment of Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor an ultra vires act and void ab initio, but indeed, in so much as Obama did not possess the authority to sign any Congressional bills – such as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – into law, issue the 172 Executive Orders he has issued, appoint any federal official nor enter into any “Treaties”, all of his acts as a putative President are void.

Needless to say, it now remains to see whether the Supreme Court will follow the Rule of Law regardless of where it takes them or whether we now have a Supreme Court which bends the Rule of Law to where they want it to go for their political ends.  The former is the hallmark of the common law upon which this Republic was formed; The latter the same tactic used by the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei starting in 1933 to make the law serve the despicable ends they sought.

59 comments:

HistorianDude said...

Once again, Vogt demonstrates that he is the proverbial poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Among the best established doctrines of our legal system is the de facto officer doctrine." The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person’s appointment or election to office is deficient.

In other words, it is noncontroversial fact of more than 500 years of Anglo-American common law that it wouldn't matter if we discovered that Obama was born on Mars to Martian parents. His acts as President would remain 100% legal and valid.

Kagan and Sotomayor will be voting in the unanimous majority when Vogt is denied certiorari without comment.

HistorianDude said...

Oh... I see that Vogt repeats his pathetic "20 Points of Forgery" in his motion to disqualify. This would be a good time to repost this:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/194384601/20-Shades-of-Vogt

Anonymous said...

Vogt doesn't seem to responded to the 20 Shades of Vogt. Does that mean he can't? That's not good. Especially if all the federal judges and Supreme Court clerks have been sent copies or links.

If he doesn't file a response to it with the Court, they will deny his petition. Wouldn't that be his fault than for not following up?

Vogtland said...

Note to "HistorianDude" who is too much of a coward to use his real name. You are wrong regarding "de facto doctrine" only applies to the actions of a government body not an individual as was stated in the filing. Obama has not proven citizenship therefore he was NEVER QUALIFIED to hold any office. Your obot lies are not working any longer. Too many people know the truth. By the way the reference from Frank Arduini is full of lies and misinterpretations and is easy to prove wrong.so no one with an IQ over 80 beleavesit once they read my affidavite. Its over for you.
But more importantly tell us why YOU support the MARXIST in the White House? When did you decide communism/socialism is a better form of government to "live" under.

Anonymous said...

One doesn't even need to be a first year law student to realize this article and motion to recuse is laughable. The opinion of an old kook who thinks he is an expert in something is not reason for two duly nominated and ratified justices of the Supreme Court to recuse themselves. The motion motion to recuse will be denied without comment as will the entire case.

HistorianDude said...

Doug, Doug, Doug... you don't know my real name? How can that be? How can anyone as brilliant as the great philosopher of science Doug Vogt not know who HistorianDude. I mean, even stupid birthers know who I am.

For god's sake man, I AM Frank Arduini. And "20 Shades of Vogt" so comprehensively eviscerates your pathetic affidavit that you have never even attempted to refute it. You can't. You are not smart enough. By the way, it's up to about 3,000 reads on SCRIBD. More than 3500 if you count the original version. Not bad, huh?

Back to the actual thread. You just flunked even the most elementary understanding of the de facto officer doctrine. It absolutely applies to individuals. The Supreme Courts has already said so in its unanimous decision in Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177, 180 (1995).

Oh, and they've already ignored at least two other prior birther attempts to have Kagan and Sotomayor disqualified from birther cases. So suck it up, Doug. You will be denied certiorari without comment, and Kagan and Sotomayor will be there when you are.

Anonymous said...

By not refuting the 20 Shades has Vogtland tacitly admitted that it is true? This doesn't help his case.

If Justice Scalia's law clerks are reading this blog they must be wondering why he is silent about 20 Shades.

HistorianDude said...

And don't forget Doug. I was willing to debate these details with you months ago. But you ran away after our very first discussion proved you were lying about the "requirements to be classified as a foreign student" that you included in your affidavit. I still sometimes wonder if I am guilty of misprision of felony for not reporting your affidavit to the court as perjurious.

Your accusations of cowardice are pure irony.

Anonymous said...

Arduini makes good points. And why does Vogt use Alinsky tactics and call everyone who disagrees with him a retarded Communist? If Vogt is so right and Arduini is so wrong, why can't Vogt just prove that?

The last time Sibley filed this nonsense, he said the Supreme Court would be like the Nazis if it didn't agree with him. So what does that make the Supreme Court if they again disagree ... double Nazis?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Sibley,

your brother in arms, the "Vogtlander" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtland), has no clue about the law. I doubt that he has a clue about anything at all.

You, on the other side, have studied the law.

It dishonours you that you repeat on your blog the nonsense that Mr. Vogt utters.

Best Regards

Your European

Born912 said...

MSB, help please: Would you be so kind as to provide the specific reference (link even?) for the rule that should prevent a fed magistrate judge from quashing a fed warrant. The Wiki pedia entry for Ms Duke needs some serious editing. Note the wiki blurb on Duke's case dismissal was recently removed on a technicality and restored with “inline citations” as required. Link en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Ann_Duke

Anonymous said...

Yes, Mario (loser of 10 Birther cases) Apuzzo played the recusal card in his Kerchner v Obama petition back in 2010. It of course was denied without comment as this one will be.

Anonymous said...

When you look at the underlined "not"s you get the impression that Mr. Sibley had a helping hand from Mario...

Montgomery Blair Sibley said...

For Born912: See 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(A) which prohibits a Magistrate Judge from quashing an indictment.

Montgomery

Patrick McKinnion said...

Vogt -

In regards to your claim that "..."de facto doctrine" only applies to the actions of a government body not an individual", the Supreme Court seems to disagree with you.

"The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person's appointment or election to office is deficient. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886). "The de facto doctrine springs from the fear of the chaos that would result from multiple and repetitious suits challenging every action taken by every official whose claim to office could be open to question, and seeks to protect the public by insuring the orderly functioning of the government despite technical defects in title to office." 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Public Officers and Employees § 578, pp. 1080-1081 (1984) (footnote omitted)."

Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177, 180 (1995) (a 9-0 decision)

Seriously, you might want to seek better legal counsel than a disbarred former attorney.

Patrick McKinnion said...

Mario Apuzzo wasn't the only one who tried that as well. Gregory Hollister tried it in Hollister v Soetoro. It was denied.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-678.htm

Anonymous said...

Patrick McKinnion said

"Seriously, you might want to seek better legal counsel than a disbarred former attorney."

The problem is that when you are trying to live out your delusions in the courts like Vogt is trying to do the only attorneys available are the scum at the bottom after the barrel has been scraped.

Anonymous said...

Sibley might want to read section 636 a bit more closely:

"[A] judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before the court, except a motion . . . to dismiss or quash an indictment or information made by the defendant . . . ."

Who filed the motion to dismiss in Duke's case, "counselor"?

Anonymous said...

Patrick McKinnion said

"Mario Apuzzo wasn't the only one who tried that as well. Gregory Hollister tried it in Hollister v Soetoro. It was denied."

Good find Patrick. Maybe the third time is the charm! Ha ha ha ha ha ...not.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Sibley,

just found this - written by you - on your blog:

"I am an eighth generation American and damn sure I am not going to meet my Ancestors without living up to their standards of honor and patriotism."

So I ask you again:

why do you dishonor yourself by promoting obvious nonsense and lies ?

Best regards
Your European

Anonymous said...

Mr, Sibley,

now that Pandora´s box is open - what came out ?

Your
European

Anonymous said...

European

I don't think it was Pandora's Box that was opened. It was something else and a foul odor came forth.

Anonymous said...

From the SCOTUS Docket for Vogt v W. District WA:

Apr 21 2014 Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari and for leave to file an affidavit under seal DENIED.

One down and one to go.

Anonymous said...

PS: Unless you count the inevitable and futile Birther motion for reconsideration of course.

STEPHEN PARKER said...

Anonymous, European, et al, you are Obama's quintessentially "useful idiots."

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker,

you know the definition of idiots ?

those who try the same thing again and again (and again) and hope for a different outcome ....

Ever seen the birther scorecard ?

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%2520CASE%2520LIST.pdf

And if Mr. Sibley reads this:

Kudos for your decision to publish critical posts on your blog, something the cowards at BirtherReport or Dr. Taitz avoid.

Still a shame that you dishonor yourself by promoting obvious nonsense.

The European


STEPHEN PARKER said...

Anonymous, the adage you incorrectly use, here, is a well known definition of insanity not idiocy. Can't you get even the small things right?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker, I tried to be kind to you.

But if you are rather insane than an idiot - let it be so.

Your
European

Anonymous said...

"Apr 23 2014 Waiver of right of respondent United States District Court for the Western District of Washington to respond filed"

Tick tick tick...Next up is scheduling the petition for conference in a few weeks where it is already DOA.

Anonymous said...

Would Sibley or Vogt be interested in a friendly wager? I'll wager that, on May 19, the SCOTUS docket will state that Vogt's petition was denied.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, not fair to shoot fish in a full herring barrel ...

Your
European

STEPHEN PARKER said...

Irrespective of the ruling in Vogt's petition, Anonymous, Europe, and the like, are strangers to the truth.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker,

so "the truth" is something that you imagine and not the proven facts ?

Go and create your own universe. May be Mr. ZuLow will come and shatter it.

Sincerely

Your
European

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker,

if you really seek the truth, you can find it here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/194384601/20-Shades-of-Vogt

Sincerely
Your European

stephen parker said...

Worried about Mike Zullo's evidence, are you, European ?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker,

why should I be worried, I have no horse in this race ...

But I am of course interested to see Mr. Zullo´s evidence.

You surely know that he and his mouthpiece Rev. Gallups have promised to deliver this evidence since Dec. 1 2012.

Frank Arduini has not only debunked, Mr. Vogt but Messieurs Zullo and Gallups as well.

Please read

"God’s Birther: The Fractal Failures of Carl Gallups"

here

www.scribd.com/doc/219610416/God-s-Birther-The-Fractal-Failures-of-Carl-Gallups

and tell me again that I should be worried about Mr. Zullo´s evidence.

Sincerely
Your
European

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker

now that Dr. Taitz gets involved, Mr. Zullo is doomed:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/an-article-alleges-that-cold-case-posse-collected-large-donations-but-did-not-file-tax-returns-not-clear-what-happened-to-all-the-money-donated-by-the-public-irs-investigating/

Your
European

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker,
just saw that you posted as "Dr. Stephen Parker" on the "Arizona´s Politics Blog". Here is my answer to you:

Nice to meet you here, Mr. Parker. And congrats for your promotion from a mere "Mr. Parker" to a "Dr. Parker".
Of course I do share your disgust with Dr. zahnwalt Orly Taitz. She is furious that a these monies went to the fraud Mike Zullo instead of her.

OTOH I am a little disappointed that you left Amo Probos without a good-bye. Didn´t you like Frank Arduanis´ works on your heroes Vogt, Zullo and Gallups ?
If you missed them, here are the links again:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/194384601/20-Shades-of-Vogt
www.scribd.com/doc/219610416/God-s-Birther-The-Fractal-Failures-of-Carl-Gallups

and to lighten up your mind, the "Birther Scorecard"
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%2520CASE%2520LIST.pdf

With best regards

Your
European

Dr. Stephen Parker said...

European: "It is better to remain silent and be thought the fool than to speak and remove all doubt."
---Rochefoucauld

Anonymous said...

Dr. Parker,

even Rochefoucauld had to borrow for his wisdom from older sources:

"Si tacuisses, Philosophus mansisses" - Boethius.

But it is nice to witness your classical education.

It would even be nicer to see you comment (refute ?) the well argumented oeuvres of Frank Arduini. Just
to lament the Queen of Birthers´attacks on Mr. Zullo is not very helpful. Can you tell when, oh when, Mr. Zullo
will open Pandora´s box and reveal his universe-shattering findings?

To help readers of this blog to understand our chatting I allow me to copy your post from Arizona´s Politics
over here:

"Orly Taitz continues her vicious, destructive attacks on Sheriff Arpaio and Mike Zullo. She may be a
pathological narcissist with delusions of grandeur, but being ill does not give her a pass or an allowance
to harm the most righteous cause since the Civil War. She will not post anything critical of her in her blog.
But someone must know how to reach her and stop her making war on Arpaio and the CCP.
Dr. Stephen Parker"

In one I do agree:

Seperating the birthers from their more or less hard earned birther-bucks is the most righteous cause since
the Civil War. At least this money can´t be spent on less noble causes like donating to the Republican Party.

Sincerely

Your
European
(Please excuse my English, which is not my first language)

Anonymous said...

Mr. Vogt, I have copied this from BirtherReport (I am not allowed to comment there, they prefer to live in an echo chamber)


"Doug Vogt: Supreme Court filing and I will be on the Kevin Gallagher Radio show Tuesday 4/29 at 7:15 p.m. EDT. You can call in 347-215-6580.

I have gotten done with the new web page on my filings to the Supreme Court regarding the compelling evidence proving Barack Obama’s Birth certificate is a forgery. The case is to establish three things:

http://www.obamaforgerybook.com/Supreme_Court_Filings_3-14-2014.html

Can a U.S. Citizen report crime(s) directly to a Federal Grand Jury.
Can a Federal Judge be forced to present compelling evidence to a Federal Grand Jury if it is in the public interest.
The Court must define what is meant by “public interest”


If the court hears my case the result will be that the Court will force the Seattle Judge to present my evidence to the Seattle Grand Jury. That will be the beginning of the end of the Obama administration. I am told it will be the equivalent of a 10 Richter earthquake in Washington DC . Let’s hope so.

On that page are 4 suggested letters you can download and write to the justices asking them to please hear my case. As you may already know the White House has hired a famous Criminal defense attorney as White House Council two days after the Supreme Court had a conference to consider two of my motions."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Vogt, why do you not answer to Frank Arduini´s debunking of your works ? You know that you are no expert, just a layman like me. Why can´t you offer the expertise of a real expert ?

Sincerely
Your European



HisorianDude said...

The fact that this case has been distributed for conference without any response from the appellees or demand by the court for same indicates that it has already been dead listed.

It will be denied without comment. Pandora's Box remains neatly closed. Not such a big deal since it already completely empty.

Anonymous said...

I notice Mr. Vogt has added suggested letters to the Supreme Court on his web page. This is an exercise in futility since the case has already been dead listed and it is on he agenda for the 5/15 conference. It will be denied without discussion.

Mr. Vogt also doesn't bother to tell the truth about his appeal. He said: "We had not heard from my appeal to the Ninth Court of Appeals in San Francisco as of mid March so we assumed that they were running out the clock so I couldn’t appeal to the Supreme Court."

This is not true; he had heard from the Ninth Circuit when they denied his petition on January 14th and said:

"“No further filings will be entertained in this closed case.
DENIED.”

That couldn't be clearer but Vogt ignored the order and ten days later filed a "Petition for Panel Rehearing". The Ninth Circuit ignored it exactly like they said they would.

Vogt (and his attorney) were certainly aware of the decision. It was referenced in their Petition for Writ for Certiorari filed at SCOTUS because they knew exactly when the period to file an appeal to SCOTUS started.

However, Vogt concocted this false story that there was something sinister about the Ninth Circuit ignoring his case to "run out the clock". Vogt knows that wasn't true.

Vogt also concocted another conspiracy about the recent appointment of the new White House Counsel, Neil Eggleston, to replace Kathy Ruemmler. The notion that this appointment had anything to do with Vogt's case is beyond silly and well into delusional territory. The Court didn't even request that the District Court in Washington file anything much less the US Attorney's office or the White House.

None of this is surprising behavior from Vogt. He lives in a world where he imagines he that has scientific insights that no one else does, that he has expertise as a document examiner that he does not have, and that he has discovered a way he can force a judge to convene a grand jury at his behest so he can present his pretend evidence. That latest is just a continuation of his delusions.

His time would be better spent with his family or volunteering his time to a worthwhile charity.

Dr. Stephen Parker said...

Anonymous: IN RE: Your penultimate paragraph, second sentence, "...and that he [Vogt] has discovered a way he can force a judge to convene a grand jury at his behest so he can present his pretend evidence." Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6 (a) (1) "In General. When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned."

Anonymous said...

Dr. Parker, this is the nutter that you relie on:

March 15th, 2014
Douglas Vogt
God’s Day of Judgment;
The Real Cause of Global Warming

Douglas Vogt is back for a follow up show. It will be a blockbuster of information that you will want to re listen to over again. This interview will fully explain the cause of the polar reversal and resulting ice age. At the time of the polar reversal, our Sun novas and that is what eventually causes the ice age.

Using the existing matter theories of existence there is no connection between what happens in the center of the Earth and the center of the Sun but the geological evidence on the Earth and Moon proves there is a connection. The model used to explain the mysteries of the ice age is his Theory of Multidimensional Reality, the first information theory of existence.

The author proves that there is a very high probability the next polar reversal will happen between September and December 2046. He found the exact date encoded in the Torah. In addition, he discovered the exact number of years between polar reversals, which is 12,068 years. The Torah has this same number encoded in its text.

It also answers the age-old religious question: What is God’s Day of Judgment and when will it happen? Douglas Vogt offers 60 major scientific discoveries or reinterpretations and 60 major Biblical discoveries. He is the first in 2595 years to discover where the real Mount Sinai was located including all the altars Moses describes in the Torah. Photos of some of these altars are in the book.

http://thefreedomreport.us/douglas-vogt-gods-day-judgment-real-cause-global-warming-march-15th-2014/

Sincerely

Your European

Dr. Stephen Parker said...

Ad hominem and/or irrelevant arguments only reveal a weakness of character.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Parker,

to call a nutter a nutter is not "ad hominem".

And the mental sanity of Mr. Vogt - who

" offers 60 major scientific discoveries or reinterpretations and 60 major Biblical discoveries. He is the first in 2595 years to discover where the real Mount Sinai was located including all the altars Moses describes in the Torah"

is not irrelevant to his "expertise" in the Obama case.

Sincerely
Your European

Anonymous said...

Stephen Parker said: " Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6 (a) (1) "In General. When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned."

Well there are lots of problems with this argument and with Vogt's complaint. First it is not up to Mr. Vogt or any civilian to determine when something is in the public interest. It is up to a judge. Judge Robart explained why a civilian cannot use a civil process to enforce federal criminal law. He cited case law to support his decision which Vogt ignored in his reply. For example Judge Robart cited United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114, 124 (1979) (“Whether to prosecute and what charge to file or bring before a grand jury are decisions that generally rest in the prosecutor’s discretion.”).

We have experts in the law who are charged with deciding what evidence to bring to grand juries. They are the federal prosecutors. Vogt tried that route and they told him no crime had been committed. That is the fundamental problem with Vogt's case. There is no crime. It exists in his mind. President Obama has presented two certified birth certificates for informational purposes. Hawaii has vouched for them. President Obama didn't nee to present anything to be nominated and elected. The courts have clearly said that. What Obama presented is irrelevant. There is no fraud.

Second there is no forgery.in any sense either legal or otherwise. Hawaii is the issuing authority. The have the final say on the authenticity of their vital records. They have spoken. It begins and ends there.

It takes on simple review of the law to see that this case was dead from the start. A civilian who thinks he is an expert cannot interject himself into a grand jury proceeding. If he thinks a crime has been committed the only recourse is to report it to law enforcement personnel. Vogt did that. They correctly ignored him. Now Vogt has wasted his own money and the courts valuable time to get an answer that any real attorney worth his salt could have told him in five minutes.

Te grand jury is not the playground for kooks and amateurs with good reason. we should all be thankful that is the case.

Dr. Stephen Parker said...

Well then, "Hawaii has vouched for them [ the birth certificates]" ; the matter is settled.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Stephen Parker said...

Well then, "Hawaii has vouched for them [ the birth certificates]" ; the matter is settled.

Yes, Dr. Parker, that is exactly what your Constitution says:

"Article IV, Section 1:

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof."

So you place the musings of a kooky nutter over your Constitution ? Strange ....

Sincerely
Your European

Anonymous said...

Sibley already made -- and lost -- the Rule 6 argument. He lost in the D.C. District Court, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Just like Vogt lost in the Washington District Court, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. And the U.S. Supreme Court will announce Vogt's further loss on May 19.

Dr. Stephen Parker said...

European: It's unbecoming of you to refer to, let alone quote from, the very fundamental document whose prerequisites for the presidency Obama fails to satisfy: That he be a Citizen of the United States and a natural born Citizen.
There being no value in further retorts, here, (if there have been any in the past), I shall let future events unfold as they will, and speak for themselves.

Anonymous said...

@"Dr." Parker: "I was wrong and I lack the character to admit it" would have been more succinct.

Anonymous said...

Anon, you are very harsh, but nontheless correct. I guess Dr. Parker got home to the hole under the rock, his troll cave.

Sincerely
Your European

BTW: Mr. Sibley is very quiet for a while now. He might not have appreciated that he got a quite easy question of law completely wrong - as well as a lot of others.

But my kudos again for letting us post here.

Kevin Davidson said...

I would remind Mr. Sibley that there have been US Senators who were seated by the Senate, even though they were constitutionally ineligible due to age. Under the Constitution the houses of congress are the sole arbiters of the qualifications of their membership. It is also clear, at least to me, that the Congress is also the sole arbiter of presidential eligibility, a determination when the vote of the Electoral College is certified.

So even if Obama had been born in Kenya and was not a US Citizen at birth, he is still the president and his Supreme Court appointments stand. There is no grounds to ask for the recusal of any Supreme Court justice on the grounds that they could be removed: they can't.

Of course, in this case, recusal is moot because there aren't 4 justices who would vote to hear the case in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Doc, not even ONE.

TheEuropean

Anonymous said...

Dear "Dr" Stephen

I'm curious, would you care to inform the group precisely what type of doctor are you?

A medical doctor, a doctorate doctor, a Doctor of Divinity, some other type of doctor..?

I would also love to hear your personal definition of the necessary prerequisites that makes on a natural born citizen.

After all you have stated that Obama fails but neglected to mention on which grounds.

Grounds of course fully consistent with the Constitution, its Amendments, current/historic and extent Supreme Court rulings etc.

One waits with breath held tightly for your education to we the masses

Leslie Lim said...

I really like your ideas. I truly appreciate your effort in publishing this article. Keep it up and God bless.

Jax
www.imarksweb.org

sarah lee said...

I really enjoyed reading your article. I found this as an informative and interesting post, so i think it is very useful and knowledgeable. I would like to thank you for the effort you have made in writing this article.


edupdf.org

Post a Comment

Play nice!